About your Search

20130318
20130326
STATION
CSPAN 18
MSNBCW 13
CSPAN2 6
CNNW 5
KQED (PBS) 3
KRCB (PBS) 3
CNBC 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
LANGUAGE
English 79
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 79 (some duplicates have been removed)
insisted of about 125 people. it has grown over the years and became a favorite stop of ronald reagan, first as a candidate, and then as president. what is next? guest: there is a divide. the conservative movement has become much bigger than it was in the 1970's. the republican party. the straw poll results are popularity contests, to be sure, but they are also a window into , and the people, the 3000 that voted in the straw poll, many of them would have supported ron paul in the past. another one-quarter are more traditional conservatives. about one-tenth or more are social conservatives. that is their primary issue. the social conservatives were those who supported rick santorum, so you have these wings of the party, and on these issues, they all agree, but on some issues, especially the social ones, there is going to be conflicts, especially over the next few years, as the party tries to determine the next election. coveringmes hohmann, the cpac conference, up early. he has been getting a lot of attention in political circles, and his work is available on- line at politico dot com.
of thing. >> ronald reagan carried pennsylvania, new jersey, california, massachusetts, ohio, florida, michigan -- all of the big states. he won 59% of the white vote. mr. romney won 59% of the white vote and he did not carry any of those states. i commend the republicans for going through this exercise. it is painful. it opens them up to scrutiny, to cheap shots, but they are doing something that most parties loss -- most parties gloss over. most parties blame the defeat on their own candidate. john mccain was the grumpy old man candidate -- that is why he lost. al gore was a stiff. that is why the democrats lost. it is an easy explanation. they are confronting something very real. they deserve great credit. it is difficult and painful. most technological advances do not come out of the party apparatus. ey come out as howard dean had social networking, and barack obama took that to different levels in 2012. >> rand paul had a speech on immigration that even marco rubio praised. >> rand paul is, to me, representing what republicans ought to be doing, and not what priebus is talking ab
much for stopping by. you've been covering every president since ronald reagan and wissed -- witnessed a lot of these occasions where reporters try to get something from the president. how have these evolved over the years? >> as you referenced. it was almost accidental. wilson thought he was sort -- simply meeting the reporters one by one, but when 100 or more pushed into the oval office, he addressed them. and then there were more that couldn't make it that day, a week later he did it again in the east room. that became the form. the first 60 years or more, there was a back and forth but it was understood that it was off the record unless a president allowed the quote. and truman and eisenhower and f.d.r. could get reporters to alter their quotes if they didn't like what they had said, sort of fix it up. the modern news conference really began with eisenhower, at least the telvized part. question?kes a good i know the answer may depend on o the president is, but what are you looking for and how do you frame your questions? >> you want to ask a -- ask a question straightforward enough
, it is hard to say. host: in april of 1988, president ronald reagan. >> george bush is doing well. george has been a wonderful vice president, but nobody is perfect. i put him in charge of anti-terrorism and the mcglove lynn -- and the mcgloughlin group is still on the air. [laughter] >> but with some -- so much focus on the presidential election, i've been feeling a little lonely these days. i'm so desperate for attention, i am considered holding a news conference. host: was there a private ronald reagan? was he different off camera than on the stage? >> he really wasn't. when you talked to ronald reagan in private, you got sort of the same stories about life in hollywood or california and politics that you often got in public. he was, in fact, a very private man. he was always cordial, always pleasant. host: did he enjoy these conferences? guest: i don't think he particularly did. host: did he look at the history -- if you look at the history, was your sense john kennedy enjoyed these conferences? guest: i believe he did. host: let's go to alex in youngstown, ohio. caller: what is his relat
years of presidential press conferences. commemoratell another anniversary. president ronald reagan and his star wars defense initiative. "washington journal" continues. we are back in a moment. >> we could take pictures of the ans and seemri sc the whole thing. there is an enormous gap about how the surface of the brain function to be able to move my hand or to look at u.n. process the information or to lay down a memory. we do not know how that works. a lot of this will be technology development. a lot of it will be nano- technology. we want to look at london's of thousands of brain cells at the same time to understand -- look at hundreds of thousands of plant cells at the same time. we do not have a scientific plan about milestones. it is getting to be an exciting moment to put something together that we cannot have thought of. nih director on c-span plus some "q & a." ofyou have been out commission since 2006. the chairman has been on since 2009. will we expect some turnover with the commission? >> we all have staggered terms. the past years have flown by quickly. we will see. i
and not an election year liability? >> i work for ronald reagan. he compromised on everything. we had a democratic house with a huge majority. he had to. the real divided government can work. ronald reagan proved it could work. clinton proved it could work. those are guys who got huge legislation enacted. the reagan economic plan, immigration reform, social security reform -- here is the thing -- the president has got to lead. >> i would say this is not the season -- compromise is not in the air. but i think that the republicans in the house realize it is in their political interest to turn the heat down and not have a food fight every few weeks for the american public. what i think is in the air and is happening is people from the far left and the far right are starting to come together against institutions and the governing parties, and you will see more of that. you saw it last week with the drones. you will see it with the banks on wall street. businesses that are impacted by the federal government in terms of getting money. there is increasingly from the left and right a coming together again
, and it's got to go. [cheers and applause] ronald reagan omelet me down a couple -- only let me down a couple of times in eight years. one of those was 1986, and i still had the dent after i heard on the news he had signed the amnesty act of 1986. but it was on the promise that there would be law enforcement, and we would restore the rule of law and a million people would be legalized. but then from there on forward the law would be enforced. well, i made sure i kept my records right waiting for the ins to show up at my office, but i never saw them. neither did thousands of businesses. but the enforcement in re began era was greater than the enforcement in any succeeding administration, and now the law is so eroded, i sat in a hearing just a couple of days ago and heard la raza say, well, we want to provide comprehensive immigration reform, and after we restore the rule of law -- la raza's telling us they're restoring the rule of law by waiving it? they've eroded the rule of law. and republicans seem to forget of the 11 or 12 million that they say are here -- and i think it's 20 -- t
movement to get elected and then feign shock when conservatives call them out for bad policy. ronald reagan cemented our values with his analogy -- that conservativism stands for free enterprise, strong national defense, and pro-family social policies. if you take one leg away from the stool, the stool crumbles. if we sell out our principles then the conservative movementthose in the establishment who claim they know how to win are simply living a lie. just look at the past two presidential campaigns. how did that work out for the establishment? only in 2010, when our conservative grassroots were fully mobilized, hand in hand with the tea party did we prevail. last month the battle lines were drawn when karl rove and company announced to "the new york times," of all places, they were forming the conservative victory project. the conservative victory project is nothing more than an attempt by the establishment to control the conservative movement. calling it the conservative victory project is like mitt romney saying he was a severe conservative. tol rove claims he wants win. why does he thi
could label the republicans or start with ronald reagan, cut taxes, big chunk toss the wealthy and then borrow the money to pay the bills. that's how you get debt, $2 trillion, $3 trillion, $4 trillion. ronald reagan had this concept, starve the beast. he said the way we're going to kill social security and medicare and medicaid, we're at right now, is to make this government's debt so big that we can't afford them. >> guest: absolutely. one second, sir. ronald reagan was never in support of killing any of those programs. i mean, that is hyperbole. >> caller: he wanted to tax on the wealthy. let me finish, please, you get -- >> guest: he cut taxes across the board, sir, on everybody. >> caller: start to filibuster because i'm going to hammer you with a question. he lored the tax on the wealthy from 70 down to 40, and that amounted over the 30 years trillions and trillions of dollars being given away to the wealthy. do you think there's a correlation between us being trillions and trillions of dollars in the hole and the fact we gave trillions and trillions of dollars away to th
of the worst relationships i can remember, and i have covered presidents all the way back it ronald reagan. these leaders are not simpatico. they have leaned over backward, and that the republican nominees did too much. the white house comes to this visit clearly with that in mind. >> i want it bring in joe ruben. good to see you. >> great to be here. thanks, craig. >> joe, we heard from andrea, the perception of the president in israel. let's talk about the perception in the palestinian areas as well. talk to me a little bit about that. >> this is the right visit at the right time. the president going to israel right now is consistent with american president's past, about making a trip in the second term. and this is his first trip. and it sends a signal to the palestinians, to israelis, that america is engaged and is serious about seeing a resolution to their conflict. it doesn't mean that united states is going to put forward a plan and force the sides to the table but it is saying, clearly, and the president's been beaten up for this quite a bit, that u.s. is paying attention and tryin
. >> let me quote dick cheney, who said ronald reagan taught us that deficits do not matter. dick cheney was wrong. he was wrong then and now. of course deficits matter, but any one of you who supported the bush plans has no right to speak. i helped bill clinton balance the budget and build a surplus. why? because we had good economic times. in good economic times, you pay down the deficit, but reagan and bush did not, and in bad you have to stimulate in the near term, as thank god president obama is doing. we democrats will balance the budget once again. >> paul, which is more important to america's pursuit of happiness -- which is more dangerous, excuse me, than a 357 magnum -- >> in my home you would find 17 guns and no cans of soda pop. i have the right wing position on the giant drink soda thing. i do not like the idea, and i think bloomberg is a fine man, but i do not like government telling us what size to buy today. this one, i am with tucker and most of you. i have the right wing position on gun safety. i have the same position as ronald reagan, who was for a waiting period befo
that clears that up. >>> patty davis, the daughter of former president ronald reagan has a novel out about a woman falling in love with her sister-in-law. she denies the story called "till human voices wake us" is a lesbian version of "50 shades of grey." >>> with reports of jimmy fallon taking over "the tonight show" and bringing it back to new york, a state budget proposal offers tax breaks for live tv talk shows that relocate to new york. some are calling it the jimmy fallon tax credit. >>> misch ole oh, was made to look like a queen wearing a tiara on british stamps. it's actually a new ad for britain's sunday times style magazine. >>> house democratic leader nancy pelosi blasted republican efforts to include entitlement reforms and any debt ceiling deal she says republicans want to eliminate medicare and privatise social security. >>> if the goal is to have them wither on the vine or reduced in a way that does not meet their purpose, then those are fighting words. >> fighting words. >>> and some very strong words on the floor of the house yesterday, thursday, rather, from minnesota re
's not certainly the same thing that he believed. and we brought up the spector of ronald reagan and he had three legs to that republican stool back then, the christian he coalition, you have the defense hawks, but you also have the small government libertarians and ronald reagan didn't preach small government because we can't afford it, but big government into the lives of american people is against the founding document. the republicans lost the argument against big government because suddenly we could afford it and look where we are now. >> megyn: it doesn't seem that rand paul is on different footing when it comes to small government. he's on different footing when it comes to foreign affairs and our military intervention. >> well, both of those positions are rooted in a constitutional argument. you can make nuanced arguments when it comes to the drone strike, you're getting lost if you thought the filibuster for 12 hours was about drones. rather seeing a republican senator stand up against the executive branch and he did something that the brilliant minds of the republican caucus had not bee
to have come to washington to work in a very minor role for ronald reagan and some of us are proud to have supported the bush administration after 9/11 and fighting epimieses and the problem with the obama administration is not that it is too assertive. the problem is that we are retreating all around the world and unfortunately emboldening our enemies. if rand paul wants to run to the left of the obama administration he is tree to ned ahat in the republican minute. maybe this is more is support for that than i think but i doubt there really is. >> chris: nina, the president thinks bringing the troops home not in a rush but steadily and eventually is a winning message in the last campaign, frankly not talking about open-ended commitments. does the gop need to recognize and respond to a war weariness in the country? >> i think the drone issue and war we areness are two totally different issues. rand paul's war and drones is a war on a pretty successful fight against terrorism right now. i'm not sure where that gets us. i agree with bill that the gop doesn't lose by being a strong party of n
in college, it's becoming more difficult to raise children frankly in this culture. ronald reagan was very good as making what was known as reagan democrats fighting for him and i think our party has get an away from that. >> i know you have different views and come from a different place, but he was really the champion at high-level politics, hitting still on issues about sexual morality, on issues like abortion. i see the party as not moving away from those issues, even as some of the intellectual discussion in the party says that that stuff needs to be let behind. do you think that's the party's future or do you think it's only in the past? >> i would say there's two things. the mistake or trap we fall in is we allow ourselves to be singularly defined by those issues. i would argue that things like abortion is an important issue. however, we can't let our party only be about abortion. the second thing is a lot of people are looking at the demographics results and argue we need to be a different party. ultd say no. you're not foing to do that. i think the republican party has to be the s
. other presidents didn't come in their first term, ronald reagan never came as president, but at the same time they expected him to come, especially after he went to cairo in 2009. can he reach on the floor his head to the israeli people. >> there are three interesting events. king hussein of jordan, almost an enemy, and the friendly bill clinton coming to israel and winning the hearts of israelis instantly, although their positions were very critical of israeli policy, definitely is a d saddat. the trick for president obama now, and i think this is exactly what he's trying to do. he says trying to clinton-ize himself, reach out and give the israelis the hug they did not get for four years. if this works, that lays the foundation for a renewed peace process, then he can come with the difficult stuff and say to israelis, i love you so much, i care for you, i stand by you, therefore you must act now and take some risks in order to improve your position, dealing with occupation and see the middle east as it is. >>> and the middle east as it is, you understand this region so well, post-arab s
weapons ban is supported by sylvester stallone and ronald reagan. two guys i never thought to see to harried reid's left. and he felt so bad that he let this ban fail, i know you're terrified of the nra turning on you and giving a low rating. you almost lost your senate seat
, ronald reagan. the hero of the conservatives, reagan never went to israel as president. and this president has acted in ways that you've talked about with the ten meetings of netanyahu, what more adequate speech can he with deal with as a collective pursuit of peace than a speech in cairo, jim? >> i mean, i think it's more than reagan, reverend. i think probably a majority of american presidents since eisenhower did not trek to israel. >> he's the hero so certainly -- >> i agree. >> something to note. >> i agree. and as a young senator during that short period of time that he was representing the state of illinois, obama, you know, went to israel. for sure joy is right on the mark about the bug up their butts that a lot of folks have about the cairo speech. but the context there was one we can forget. it's in which a new administration firmly believed, whether you agree with them or not, that its predecessor, george w. bush, had been fighting essentially a war on islam. that was the view on the arab street and the obama folks went out very directly in cairo in 2009 to r
baker was ronald reagan's chief of staff getting ready for the famous trip to china had he ever been to a communist country. he said, yes, i have been to massachusetts. this is another example of it. this is ridiculous. >> how do you compete with that? >> his head is getting big. >> remi, you hate children unless they committed a horrible crime. you are probably on the principal side, right? >> i told you not to tell anyone about the children thing. as my father would say, stupid nonsense. children need to learn about life. they need to learn it from an early age. this is not real life. if you succeed and work hard and do well, you will be rewarded. if you don't reach that certain level to get the honors, you are not going to be rewarded. it is not a dig at the other children. it is a lame attempt to be fair. they are really doing a disservice to the students. >> the story could not be less relevant to you, could it? >> that's why i love this story. you have missed one very big upside. no more bumper stickers. no more isn't my kid great bumper sticker. >> my brother wasn't an honor s
visited israel, but ronald reagan never thought israel was worth the trip. nor did his successor, president george h.w. bush. then president bill clinton made up for that 12 years of neglect by visiting israel three times. and president george w. bush visited israel once in the last year of his presidency. so not every president visits israel, especially republican presidents, but modern presidential candidates do visit israel. barack obama actually first went to israel in 2006 when he was still an illinois senator. he went again in 2008 when he was running for president. you'll know chris christie is serious about running for president when he schedules a trip to israel. mitt romney went to israel last year in a desperate attempt to exploit a republican lie, that there was some kind of difference between president obama and it's really prime minister benjamin netanyahu about what the borders of israel should be. romney was aided and abetted in that lie by netanyahu, who is an old friend of romney's. they worked together 30 years ago at a boston consulting firm. as we reviewed la
him on past u.s. presidents. >> what does ronald reagan say? [ inaudib
successful in getting elected, governor ronald reagan, governor george w. bush. politics changes and the question is people are going to be looking at republican nominees from the perspective do they have the ability to lead the country. are they a leader? some of them bike bobby jindal or mickey haley or martinez of new mexico or john kas governor snyder, all these people may be able to emphasize their experience but also marco rubio, you mentioned. rand paul is going may be a candidate. i think at some point for the top spot but the second part, senator from new hampshire and governor chris christie, if he gets re-elected is going to be a player if he wants to be a player. >> greta: do you see a bigger role for the people that identify themselves as tea party candidates or do you think that freshly in light of the recent rnc report certain things like suggesting perhaps fewer debates which may be more difficult for less well known candidate. what do you see looking into the future? >> a dozen debates is going to be adequate for anybody to get known. 22 hurt the republican party
.s. presidents.si >> what does ronald reagan say? >> mr. gorbachev, tear that wal
of ronald reagan and stop conservatism and just go back to the good old truth that is worked back then, that reagan laid for the incredible ground work of the economy in the 1980's and 1990's. clinton helped to some extent, ut then he created and repealed glass-steagall, and everybody blames it on george bush. the conservatives who didn't do much for the letter peace, we tried to expand under karl rove, the voting process, and giving more to hispanic community, and we didn't get one increase in vote in that eight-year period so. what makes you think that we're going to give amnesty and all the set get a bunch of votes? it's fraud, and it's another really ploy by the democratic party to keep promising and benefits to everybody who will vote for them no matter what. scommoip we're going to talk about immigration in our next segment of the "washington journal" today. but we still have about five minutes left in this segment, if you want to call in to give us your take on this growth and opportunities report that was released today, or if you think hanges in the republican debates would ha
obama give the order to have these people killed? is that what you're saying? caller: ronald reagan was not hesitating that's for sure. hal: ronald reagan would have killed the american ambassador in benghazi? caller: i heard speeches of ronald reagan and they sound completely different as they do to obama. hal: you mean the speeches around iron-contra, for example. caller: and nobody's perfect. hal: nobody's perfect. >> how can you speculate how president reagan would react in today's environment? i think milltail things have changed. hal: if policies any indication, he'd be a democratic, because he'd have to change parties after he was primaried as a republican. jacki: because he was too moderate. the nature of warfare that ha changed, too. hal: george is talking out of his posterior. you can tell with the conversion from benghazi to reagan. jacki: a cooling gel might be good for that. hal: i would say to george before he calls back in and tries on another show or either on this one to push that as a paired example of presidential egregious behavior to read up on history. there ar
for ronald reagan. he compromised on everything. we had a democratic house with a huge majority. he had to. the real divided government can work. ronald reagan proved it could work. clinton proved it could work. those are guys who got huge legislation enacted. the reagan economic plan, immigration reform, social security reform -- here is the thing -- the president has got to lead. for four years we have had a president was not willing to take that kind of leadership to make congress work. i hope he will this term. >> i would say this is not the season -- compromise is not in the air. but i think that the republicans in the house realize it is in their political interest to turn the heat down and not have a food fight every few weeks for the american public. what i think is in the air and is happening is people from the far left and the far right are starting to come together against institutions and the governing parties, and you will see more of that. you saw it last week with the drones. you will see it with the banks on wall street. businesses that are impacted by the federal governmen
at these three world leaders too. ronald reagan never made sure his time matched -- >> okay. this is just ridiculous. >> there you go. >> stungningly profind. >> let's go to politico, please. with us now -- >> also makes him superior to ronald reagan, right? >> whatever. >> the messiah has returned to israel. look at that. >> are you kidding me? >>> with us now is chief white house correspondent for politico, mike allen, here with the morning playbook. >> this is a good one. >> watch the live pictures while we talk to mike. i think we can walk and chew gum at the same time according to joe. >> i doubt it. >> mike, new report from politico suggest a number of big name democrats are not thrilled with the idea of ashley judd challengi challenging senate minority leader in conduct. some party leaders including former president bill clinton is trying to court another candidate. the kentucky secretary of state. the former president encouraged her to run assuring his and hillary clinton's support should she try to unseat mcconnell. judd under fire for a speech she delivered in 2010 she compared
ronald reagan say? >> mr. gorbachev, tear that wall down. >> what does bill clinton say? >> i did not have relations with that woman. >> very good. what does john f. kennedy say? >> ask not what you can do for your country -- ask not what you can do for your country. >> pretty good. >> but -- >> okay. what does george w. bush -- >> but ask what your country can do for you. >> okay. what does george w. bush say? >> [inaudible] >> what does george h. bush say? >> read my lips. no new taxes. >> what does our main man, barack obama, say? >> yes, we can! yes, we can! yes, we can! yes, we can! >> very good. >>brian: ladies and gentlemen, a two-year-old. that's incredible. >>anna: we've got to get this kid on the show. >>steve: he got a little hung up on what john f. kennedy said but he knew exactly what bill clinton said. >>brian: unbelievable. i don't know if he know what bill clinton said. >>steve: he knew the line. >>brian: he even knew how to count. incredible. >>anna: 6:34. to your news headline. senate majority leader harry reid con conceding duet on the democrats -- con seethe de
in american politics. ronald reagan was president. republicans controlled the senate, not the house, but rage gain has been successful in getting things through the house. immersed a whole bunch evidence to say that there had been, i called it media realignment. that the media was getting more conservative or at least less liberal and i wrote a whole piece on the cover of the new republic. it was completely wrong. as it turned out. i had all of this evidence that i thought added up to something and it really did not. >> does it matter though? >> of course it matter? s. >> why? >> look at the 2012 bam campaign. >> you never changed your views and you lived around the liberal media? what does it matter? are they all sheep following the media says? >> oh, who? >> others. >> the reporters. well, there have been some who have come out. i remember charles when he was liberal. i remember mike when he was a pollster for a liberal democratic polling firm. so some people have changed. >> i am talking about the public? >> sure. >> the public, does the public see only liberal coverage and say, yeah, tha
. and that's not unprecedented. ronald reagan never went two terms, george w. bush took the tail end of his second term. but there has been a difficult relationship with netanyahu. and he goes at a time when the whole region is in turmoil. >> you're right, they're lowering, the white house is lowering expectations, the trip is largely to offset the 2009 trip that president obama took to cairo. where he made a speech to cairo and then did not go to israel, went on to buchenwald, talked about the holocaust, but missed the beginnings of israel. this is a chance to kind of, i don't want to say make it right. but to reach out to israelis in a way he hasn't before. he's not speaking at the knesset. he's speaking to young israelis at a convention center, he's doing things differently at this time. >> and what's the significance of him going to the weitzman statue. this was the leader of zionism. and that's anathema to many people in the arab world, but a way of saying i stand with israel. to israel it's important because it predates the holocaust. by centuries. millennium, it says that israelis ha
is conservative enough. there was a -- listen, when ronald reagan was president, the people who represented what they thought was the -- you know, the real republican wing of the republican party, often complained about him, that he wasn't conservative enough to suit them either. sarah palin, despite having bailed out of public office, still has a following in the republican party, and you know, you criticize her, you hear about it. so does karl rove, he has influence with a lot of people who are prepared to put money behind his strategic thinking and the mistake that was made here that got rove into this trouble in my judgment is that when he and his group decided they were going to try to have influence in these primaries they announced that the people who felt that rove represented the failures of the bush years and so on, that was a red flag and you are seeing the reaction to it. >> bill: okay. but having talked to karl rove many, many times on this program, i can tell you that he is a guy who doesn't want a conservative litmus test to limit some candidates who may be more moderate and appea
more difficult to raise children frankly in this culture. and ronald reagan was good making what was known as reagan democrats feel good he was fighting for them and our party has gotten away from that. >> your candidate in the primaries, don't mean to con flat you and mr. santorum, you have different views, come from a different place, he was really the champion of cultural politics at high level republican politics, hitting still on issues about gay rights, on issues about sexual morality, on issues like abortion. i see the party as not moving away from those issues, even as some of the intellectual discussion says that stuff needs to be left behind. is that the party's future or only the past? >> i would say there's two things. one, the mistake or trap we fall in is we allow ourselves to be singularly defined by those issues. i would argue things like abortion is an important issue. however, we can't let our party only be about abortion. sometimes we fall in the trap of letting that happen. second thing, a lot of people look at demographics and election results and say we have
ronald reagan. i saw them when i went to the saddam museum in baghdad. the neocons came to power with an agenda for regime change in iraq. on 9/11 they were salivating. the general of the joint chiefs at the time told me rumsfeld, wolfowitz, all these guys started iraq, iraq, iraq, at the first meeting after 9/11. the fact is these guys had a mission to try to redraw the maps of the middle east. that's a fact. and dick cheney did not invent the idea of the executive branch being a dictatorship when it comes to foreign policy in america. unfortunately president obama has continued some of the things cheney, rumsfeld and these guys laid the groundwork for earlier. my god, cheney headed up halliburton for the 1990s. he had oil on the mind all the time. the irony is the u.s. isn't winning the oil in iraq. these guys failed at their own game, the neocons. >> mike, as you look forward at iraq's, from iraq's current position into the future, what are your expectations for that nation? >> it's a great question, martin. you know, it's the crucial question, as we think about this day. i wa
bush or ronald reagan, correct me colonel north, if i'm wrong, you worked for president reagan, i can't see a president doing nothing time and time again and the only people he seems to be nice to are radicals like mohammed morsi? >> and the united nations. what we've done, we've gone to the united nations well so many time, and what he's done is allowed himself and believe that the united nations was going to stop the north koreans, inter-continental ballistic missiles. they've done it and unless we say carefully, if you have a business that's doing business with either of these two countries, you cannot do business with the united states. >> sean: colonel north, let me ask you this, do you think the world by these acts of aggression, and that's how i view them. do you think they perceive barack obama as weak? >> what they're hoping for is american leadership from the front and they're not getting it today. >> nobody thinks america is weak and anybody who does needs to look at what we did in afghanistan. we put men on the ground, we put our money behind it and we've accomplished our
in your book, that in the ronald reagan, 1984 debate. tell us what happened. >> well, they had, reagan had a bad first debate and people were saying that he was confused and say that he was too old. and roger was brought in as a kind of a debate counselor for reagan and he told reagan, look, you're the president. you've got -- obviously you don't need to impress people with facts and figures, you need to be yourself. and i found out later, as i worked on this book for fox and his advice to everybody when they go on the air is to be themselves. and reagan took the advice and did very well in the second debate. >> greta: and of course, the famous line out of that second debate about mondale's age, at least, that's roger's line? >> i don't think it's roger's line, but everybody around reagan was afraid to mention to him that people thought he was too old and roger, who is not afraid of much told reagan directly, you have to come up with something that will address the concern about your age. and reagan came up with that, with that line. >> greta: which was that he wasn't going to make age an
or ronald reagan, can i see a president doing nothing time and time again and the only people he seems to be nice to are radicals like mohammed morsi. >> we've got gon to the oouts united nations. some times oh, good grieve. he's aloud himself and hope the united nations is going to somehow stop or north koreans. they've done it. iranians will do it, too. and this is unless they impose kinds of sanctions if have you a business doing business with these countries dmoukt business in the united states. >> do you think the world by these acts after gregs is how i view them, do you they they perceive barack obama as weak? >> they're hoping for leadership from the front. they're not getting it today. >> nobody thinks america is weak. anyone who does needs to look at what we did. we have put men on the ground. and accomplished our mission. it's time for the american foam say enough of the war. >> i see him as weak. i think the president is weak. that is a shame. because do you know what? america needs to be strong. if we don't fill the void and step up and lead from the front then i shoulder
covering since ronald reagan. and the first interview was al-arabi al-arabiya. and in cairo talked about a new beginning between the united states and muslim world. i think we've seen pan out a muslim brotherhood government in control and we misread the arab spring and the muslim brotherhood said they wouldn't run someone for president and they did. we've seen hamas stronger as well as hezbollah, islamic jihad. and we've seen incredibly unstable situation in syria. when i was there on a congressional visit and we sat down with president netanyahu, one thing he asked, he was concerned about iran and the dominance and occurred and we have the iranian guard in syria. and their march toward having the nuclear device so they can have dominance. >> sean: that's all true and it's gotten worse, leslie, after the suck up to the world apology tour. and king be abdullah, jordan, says it's naive, that the muslim brotherhood are wolves in sheep's clothing, risky for him. and this president is giving 1.5 billion dollars, and f-16 jets and tanks it a guy that views the israelis as the descendents of ap
, everybody -- republicans i talk to go back to the days when ronald reagan passed immigration reform. and the problem with that everyone agrees was that the borders were not secure first. so republicans are nervous that that could happen again. and they want to make sure that doesn't occur. there's also another stumbling block in the guest worker program. how do you provide for guest workers to come into this country? that's an issue for democrats in particular. so there are stumbling blocks that would have been done years ago. but again political self-interest is at stake here. when that occurs, maybe they'll actually do it. >> all right. gloria borger, thanks so much from washington. >> sure. >>> let's talk a little b-ball. march madness, the ncaa tournament, well, it's off to a pretty incredible start. we are courtside with the cnn march madness express. [ male announcer ] if you stash tissues like a squirrel stashes nuts, you may be muddling through allergies. try zyrtec® liquid gels. nothing starts working faster than zyrtec® at relieving your allergy symptoms for 24 hours. zy
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 79 (some duplicates have been removed)